Navigant Research » Bloghttp://www.navigantresearch.com
Tue, 03 Mar 2015 17:43:18 +0000en-UShourly1http://wordpress.org/?v=3.8.1New York Details Its Vision for the Future of Energyhttp://feedproxy.google.com/~r/NavigantResearchBlog/~3/jAcFXciOwKw/new-york-details-its-vision-for-the-future-of-energy
http://www.navigantresearch.com/blog/new-york-details-its-vision-for-the-future-of-energy#commentsMon, 02 Mar 2015 18:07:00 +0000https://www.navigantresearch.com/?p=73121On February 26, the New York Public Service Commission (PSC) released its long-awaited Phase 1 Order on its Reforming the Energy Vision (REV) proceeding. The order lays out the PSC’s vision for how the future retail electricity market in the state should operate to maximize efficiency, improve reliability, engage customers, and create clean, affordable energy [...]]]>

On February 26, the New York Public Service Commission (PSC) released its long-awaited Phase 1 Order on its Reforming the Energy Vision (REV) proceeding. The order lays out the PSC’s vision for how the future retail electricity market in the state should operate to maximize efficiency, improve reliability, engage customers, and create clean, affordable energy products and services. I can’t cover the entire 328-page order in one blog, but I’ll hit on the major decisions that affect the current utility world order.

The biggest variable in the REV equation was whether the PSC would require an independent party to perform the function of the distributed system platform (DSP), the central role of REV. According to the order, the DSP’s functions include load and network monitoring, enhanced fault detection/location, and automated voltage and volt-ampere reactive (VAR) control. That list covers a lot of what the utilities currently do, so taking those tasks away from them would have caused a major shift in the market landscape. However, the Phase 1 Order outright supports utilities acting as the DSP as a way to minimize the redundancy of actions. This singular decision vastly limits the potential impacts to the state and the utilities. Utilities must be breathing a sigh of relief.

Metering Alternatives

A second thorny issue was whether utilities should be able to own distributed energy resources (DER) or whether DER should be the sole domain of the competitive marketplace. Many market players wanted to prohibit the utilities from competing with them when they might have a natural advantage in acquiring customers. Under the order, utilities will be able to own DER if they run a solicitation to meet a system need and they are able to show that competitive alternatives are inadequate or more costly than a traditional infrastructure alternative. They will also be able to invest in storage to the extent it functions as part of the transmission and distribution (T&D) system. This seems like a reasonable compromise that should work for most parties.

The last major component is advanced metering infrastructure (AMI). Earlier communications from the PSC hardly mentioned metering at all, so it was unclear how the final rule would play out. In fact, the Phase 1 Order does not mandate AMI deployment by utilities. Rather, the PSC prefers the term “advanced metering functionality” (AMF)—meaning that other technologies, including ones provided by third parties, may be able to achieve the desired functionality cheaper and more efficiently than AMI. It states that “each utility Distributed System Integration Plan (DSIP) will need to include a plan for dealing with advanced metering needs; however, plans that involve third party investment may be preferred over sweeping ratepayer funded investments.” This indicates that utilities should consider AMI alternatives before choosing a path forward.

Ticking Clock

As far as next steps, the utilities’ integration plans must be filed by December 15, 2015, so the clock is ticking. Phase 2 of REV will consider reforming the PSC’s ratemaking process so that utilities do not have disincentives to further developing DER. Utility income is tied to bond funds now, but they should depend more on creating value for customers and achieving policy objectives. A draft proposal is expected by June.

It was interesting trying to guess which way the PSC would fall on these and other major issues. Now the real fun begins: implementing the vision.

]]>http://www.navigantresearch.com/blog/new-york-details-its-vision-for-the-future-of-energy/feed0http://www.navigantresearch.com/blog/new-york-details-its-vision-for-the-future-of-energyHow the Internet of Things is Changing Healthcarehttp://feedproxy.google.com/~r/NavigantResearchBlog/~3/zorgP-osbCk/how-the-internet-of-things-is-changing-healthcare
http://www.navigantresearch.com/blog/how-the-internet-of-things-is-changing-healthcare#commentsWed, 25 Feb 2015 15:45:49 +0000https://www.navigantresearch.com/?p=73009Much talked about in the energy efficiency sector, the Internet of Things (IoT) refers to a world where everything from lamps to HVAC systems to entire grids will one day be connected. The concept has gained traction in recent years, but deployments remain modest. Only an estimated 1% of the world’s buildings use systems to [...]]]>

Much talked about in the energy efficiency sector, the Internet of Things (IoT) refers to a world where everything from lamps to HVAC systems to entire grids will one day be connected. The concept has gained traction in recent years, but deployments remain modest. Only an estimated 1% of the world’s buildings use systems to control and network lighting, and only 7% of commercial building lighting is operated using smart controls.

However, controls products offer huge energy consumption savings opportunities. Enlighted Inc., one lighting controls vendor, claims that its wireless sensor system can cut commercial building energy consumption by 50% to 75%. In an environment where healthcare costs are predicted to increase by 6% annually for the next decade and uncertainty lingers concerning the Affordable Care Act, cost-savings opportunities like that are enthusiastically welcomed.

Update Needed

In the healthcare sector, IT investments increasingly emphasize connectivity and networked systems. Networking enables healthcare systems to lower costs while improving patient experiences and facilitating an advanced degree of care customization. Particularly in the United States, where the cost of patient discharge is about $18,000 (versus $6,000 in other developed nations), networked systems can dramatically cut administrative costs.

One of the greatest benefits is the ability to test and diagnose devices remotely. This can help to reduce device downtime and avoid unexpected breakdowns, thus avoiding shutdown costs and patient rescheduling. Connected devices, such as MRIs, CT scanners, and lab test equipment, can signal when critical operational components are being depleted.

Efficient scheduling is another benefit of IoT technology in healthcare facilities. By leveraging utilization statistics, hospital employees are able to optimize equipment use and avoid over-scheduling procedures.

Seeing the Patterns

The expanded capabilities of smart, connected products and the data they generate are becoming necessary in the increasingly competitive healthcare sector. In addition to cost-cutting benefits, the IoT is opening extensive opportunities for improved operational efficiency and patient satisfaction. This emerging Internet of Healthy Things is composed of apps and hardware that promote positive health outcomes and focus on preventive healthcare for individuals. For example, Fitbit’s wearable device captures health-related data, such as sleep patterns, activity levels, and other personal metrics, to provide a complete picture of behavior and baseline vital signs. Medical device companies offer home health-monitoring systems that allow physicians to remotely monitor their patients’ clinical status. For example, Propeller Health’s asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) tracker allows a doctor to remotely monitor patients’ symptoms. Other apps exist to monitor a range of other health issues, including diabetes.

Although the healthcare sector has been traditionally slow to embrace new technology, the IoT offers improvements for both facility management and individual patient care. As tele-health and other in-home care options continue to expand, IoT-enabled devices can enable progressive hospitals to remain competitive—and improve outcomes.

]]>http://www.navigantresearch.com/blog/how-the-internet-of-things-is-changing-healthcare/feed0http://www.navigantresearch.com/blog/how-the-internet-of-things-is-changing-healthcareOil Price Retreat Could Spur Government Actionhttp://feedproxy.google.com/~r/NavigantResearchBlog/~3/2t5VajyJwiE/oil-price-retreat-could-spur-government-action
http://www.navigantresearch.com/blog/oil-price-retreat-could-spur-government-action#commentsWed, 25 Feb 2015 01:20:19 +0000https://www.navigantresearch.com/?p=73003Although the oil market has been historically volatile, the circumstances of the latest price dive suggest that low oil prices may be the new norm. If that’s the case, it could negatively affect both oil companies and the markets for clean transportation technologies like alternative fuel vehicles (AFVs).
Because of U.S. and some state government policies [...]]]>

Although the oil market has been historically volatile, the circumstances of the latest price dive suggest that low oil prices may be the new norm. If that’s the case, it could negatively affect both oil companies and the markets for clean transportation technologies like alternative fuel vehicles (AFVs).

Because of U.S. and some state government policies that mandate automakers produce more fuel-efficient vehicles and/or AFVs, low oil prices mean that it’s more expensive for automakers to improve fuel efficiency and produce AFVs to make these vehicles competitive with less fuel-efficient, and less costly, conventional vehicles. If they don’t absorb these costs, they’ll likely wind up paying penalties for being out of compliance with fuel efficiency standards and AFV mandates.

Raise the Tax

Federal and state government subsidies and incentives for AFVs provide some insulation from these costs. Yet, these policies were designed in an environment where oil prices were 30%–50% higher than they currently are. More recently, two policies have been proposed that would be beneficial to automakers seeking to comply with stringent fuel efficiency standards and AFV mandates. The first is an increase in the gas tax; the second, an increase to the U.S. federal incentive for plug-in electric vehicles (PEVs) and the inclusion of natural gas-powered vehicles in that incentive.

The federal gas tax is currently 18.4 cents per gallon of gasoline and 24.4 cents per gallon of diesel. The tax, which has not been increased since 1993, is used to fund the repair and update of U.S. roads through the federal Highway Trust Fund. In recent years, the fund has been on the brink of insolvency but kept afloat by stopgap measures that provide money from the U.S. general fund. The current proposal, which would increase the tax by 5 cents per gallon over the next 3 years, would provide $210 billion over the next 10 years. The following chart shows the effect the proposal would have on the average U.S. price of gasoline over the next 10 years if oil prices rise to $90/barrel by 2025.

Gas Prices Under Increased Tax Proposal, United States: 2002-2025

(Sources: Navigant Research, U.S. Energy Information Administration)

Getting Flexible

The federal incentive for PEVs currently maxes out at $7,500 per vehicle and is accessed by the PEV owner when they file taxes for the year they bought their PEV. Of note, a PEV owner has to accrue at least $7,500 of taxable income to receive the max incentive. The White House has proposed to increase the incentive to $10,000 per vehicle, provide it as a point-of-sale rebate, and include natural gas-powered vehicles as eligible. The point-of-sale rebate would enable AFV buyers to incorporate the incentive into monthly payments upon purchase and receive the full incentive irrespective of their income.

The effect of both policies would make AFVs more competitive with conventional vehicles on an energy cost basis and open AFVs up to a larger, lower-income market, making it much easier for automakers to comply with federal and state fuel efficiency programs. This is not the first time these policies have been proposed, and it’s likely they’ll meet similar fates as their predecessors. However, low oil prices do introduce a new dynamic that may provide some flexibility in Congress, as well as increased pressure from interest groups that may create the necessary support.

In 2014, Mitsubishi Heavy Industries (MHI) formed a joint venture with Vestas called MHI Vestas Offshore Wind. The strategy behind that joint venture is now substantially clearer. MHI’s decision to stop the commercialization of its 7 MW SeaAngel offshore wind turbine, to focus instead on the Vestas V164-8.0 MW turbine under MHI Vestas Offshore Wind, makes sense given Vestas’ expertise in the offshore market and the need to move forward without confusion or conflict between the two turbine platforms.

Technology-wise, the SeaAngel’s novel Digital Displacement Transmission Technology (DDT) looked like the more advanced drivetrain system. It employs a sophisticated series of hydraulic pumps, values, and motors to transfer the energy from the constantly varying rotor speed to a fixed speed generator, without the use of a gearbox. No other wind turbine employs a hydraulic drivetrain like this.

That novel technology, however, adds uncertainty to the construction and operation of offshore wind farms.

Risk Avoidance

The increased construction and turbine servicing costs and associated risks for offshore wind increase the rate of return that investors expect to up to 12% compared to an onshore wind farm’s 7% to 9% in developed markets. Once you add the risk of employing a completely new transmission technology system, you likely outweigh the benefits offered by the new drivetrain design. The joint venture with Vestas provides access to a similarly sized turbine based on a proven and more conventional, medium speed geared technology, eliminating the added risk.

Although Vestas’ turbine is also new in the market, the company’s offshore turbine reliability has dramatically improved since 2004, when it had to replace the transformers and generators in all 81 of its then new V80 machines at Horns Rev offshore wind farm. Much refinement and advancement specific to offshore has been achieved by Vestas and its peers.

No Confusion

It’s also important to send a clear signal to the market that the Vestas V164-8.0 turbine is the primary turbine offering of the joint venture, without a separate Mitsubishi-branded product offered outside or within the joint venture. Although the SeaAngel turbine will disappear as a stand-alone brand, testing of the hydraulic technology will continue.

Onshore testing of the full-size 7 MW turbine officially began on February at a test center in the United Kingdom for validation of the drivetrain design. A similar hydraulic-powered turbine may be installed later in 2015 in Japan on a floating platform, depending on the results from the U.K. tests.

Ultimately, the aim of the effort is to focus on refinement and validation of the hydraulic drivetrain for possible future use under the MHI Vestas joint venture. The floating platform may, in coming years, become part of the joint venture’s offerings as well. For now, though, the V164-8.0 turbine using proven Vestas technology is marching out to sea, having recently landed its first order of 32 units for the 258 MW Burbo Bank Extension project on the west coast of the United Kingdom in the Irish Sea. Hiring has just begun to build the 80 meter turbine blades.

Roberto Labastida contributed to this post.

]]>http://www.navigantresearch.com/blog/vestas-mitsubishi-settle-on-offshore-turbine-design/feed0http://www.navigantresearch.com/blog/vestas-mitsubishi-settle-on-offshore-turbine-designFinding a Pathway to Profit for EV Charginghttp://feedproxy.google.com/~r/NavigantResearchBlog/~3/hpq-8riEY9o/finding-a-pathway-to-profit-for-ev-charging
http://www.navigantresearch.com/blog/finding-a-pathway-to-profit-for-ev-charging#commentsTue, 24 Feb 2015 23:18:02 +0000https://www.navigantresearch.com/?p=72999The question of whether it’s possible to make a profit from a public charging station continues to hang over the electric vehicle (EV) charging industry. The challenges are threefold:
The costs of the EV charger and installation, which remain fairly high.
The utilization rate; i.e., how many plug-in electric vehicles (PEVs) are actually using the chargers each [...]]]>

The question of whether it’s possible to make a profit from a public charging station continues to hang over the electric vehicle (EV) charging industry. The challenges are threefold:

The costs of the EV charger and installation, which remain fairly high.

The utilization rate; i.e., how many plug-in electric vehicles (PEVs) are actually using the chargers each day.

The question of what PEV drivers are willing to pay for the charging.

Level 2 charging is still the most widespread type of installation deployed in public charging, and a back-of-the-envelope payback model shows that it is possible to receive a reasonable return on investment (ROI) for a Level 2 charger with high utilization and the right price point. A networked Level 2 charger with two plugs typically costs around $5,000–$6,500. Installation costs vary significantly, but can easily double the upfront investment by the site host. Operating costs are actually quite low. The electricity used is not a major cost factor, even at a relatively high cost of $0.13 per kWh (as in California, for instance). Typically, the site host will pay monthly services fees to a network operator. In some cases, it will share revenue with the operator, as well.

Just in Case

It’s important to note that there are only so many hours in the day that a public charger is going to be both accessible and likely to be used. If a dual public charger can reach utilization of around 10 charging sessions per day, and charge $2 per session, the host could make back the initial investment in 5 to 6 years.

This picture is a little rosier than the reality today, simply because the current rate of usage of public chargers is nowhere near 10 charging sessions daily. Nevertheless, this simple ROI model demonstrates that there is a pathway to profit for offering public charging services. However, there is a real question as to how many drivers will be willing to pay $2 for around 20 miles of charge, which is what a typical battery electric vehicle (BEV) driver may get from a single charging session. Given that this should cost them less than a dollar when they charge at home, it’s not clear that Level 2 public charging will ever be much more than a just-in-case opportunity for drivers. This will be even more accurate as we see affordable, longer range BEVs come on the market, since the need to top up during the day will be lessened.

Keeping It Free

These economics are one reason why many businesses will continue to offer public charging as a free service, figuring that there’s more benefit from using the chargers to attract customers, and keep them shopping longer, than to collect charging fees. It’s also why public charging manufacturers are offering leasing or no money down, no interest financing to keep the upfront cost from being so daunting.

According to Navigant Research’s new report, Electric Vehicle Charging Services, global revenue from EV charging services is expected to grow from $81.1 million annually in 2014 to $2.9 billion by 2023.

EV charging is a promising new, multibillion-dollar business sector. These forecasts include revenue from DC charging, which is likely to be a more lucrative segment than Level 2. But our scenario also assumes that some public charging will remain as a free perk, rather than as a direct revenue generator, given the questions that linger about drivers’ willingness to pay for top-up Level 2 charging.

]]>http://www.navigantresearch.com/blog/finding-a-pathway-to-profit-for-ev-charging/feed0http://www.navigantresearch.com/blog/finding-a-pathway-to-profit-for-ev-chargingUtilities Send in the Droneshttp://feedproxy.google.com/~r/NavigantResearchBlog/~3/V153TZg1lLQ/utilities-send-in-the-drones
http://www.navigantresearch.com/blog/utilities-send-in-the-drones#commentsThu, 19 Feb 2015 22:56:06 +0000https://www.navigantresearch.com/?p=72903Your local electric utility may be the next company to deploy unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), a.k.a. drones, in your community. Transmission and distribution utilities are planning to deploy fleets of drones for power line inspections in order to more rapidly identify foliage encroachments on power lines, storm damage, and overloading in both urban and remote [...]]]>

Your local electric utility may be the next company to deploy unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), a.k.a. drones, in your community. Transmission and distribution utilities are planning to deploy fleets of drones for power line inspections in order to more rapidly identify foliage encroachments on power lines, storm damage, and overloading in both urban and remote areas.

These types of inspections typically have been completed using manned helicopters. Since the Northeast blackout in 2003, North American electric utilities have spent millions to fly helicopters over their power lines to meet new grid reliability standards. Drones offer a cheaper and more reliable alternative.

At the Consumer Electronics Show (CES) show in Las Vegas, a whole section of the exhibit floor was devoted to drone technologies. Forward-thinking utilities have picked up that point.

What They Need to Know

A recent article in Electric Light & Powerdiscussed the utilization of light-reflecting imaging technologies that create 3D images of the environment, called Lidar, to more thoroughly monitor electric transmission rights-of-way. According to Duke Energy, “Lidar’s 3-D models tell us everything we need to know about loading on our lines and nearby encroachments.”

Innovative electric transmission and distribution operators have been working with the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to utilize UAVs across their systems. However, utilities won’t be piloting drones until the FAA finalizes rules that govern their safe operations in the National Airspace System. The FAA planned to finalize those rules by 2015 but is not expected to meet that deadline. Utility proponents suggest UAVs can make the nation’s infrastructure more reliable and secure, perhaps warranting an FAA exemption.

Unmanned Pilots

A number of pilot demonstrations of UAV applications and use cases have been occurring across the United States, notably with Duke Energy on the East Coast and San Diego Gas & Electric (SDG&E) in the west. The use cases for UAVs are not limited to transmission and distribution power line inspection; they also include critical functions such as:

High-risk jobs like scanning a wind turbine blade for cracks 400 feet in the air without human intervention.

Improved power restoration efforts in the aftermath of major storms. For example, in 2012, the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) suggested drones could assess damage and help bucket trucks and line technicians prioritize power restoration.

In 2014, the FAA granted SDG&E an experimental certificate, also known as a Special Airworthiness Certificate, for UAVs. That certificate allows SDG&E to use drones for research, testing, and training flights in lightly populated airspace in eastern San Diego County. “The unmanned aircraft system provides us with another tool in our electric and gas operations tool chest,” said Dave Geier, SDG&E’s vice president of electric transmission and system engineering.

]]>http://www.navigantresearch.com/blog/utilities-send-in-the-drones/feed0http://www.navigantresearch.com/blog/utilities-send-in-the-dronesCommunity Resilience and the Future of Small Gridshttp://feedproxy.google.com/~r/NavigantResearchBlog/~3/psxIBg0cTrk/community-resilience-and-the-future-of-small-grids
http://www.navigantresearch.com/blog/community-resilience-and-the-future-of-small-grids#commentsThu, 19 Feb 2015 22:18:28 +0000https://www.navigantresearch.com/?p=72900The spate of extreme weather events in recent years has stirred up interest in the concept of “community resilience”—i.e., the creation of more reliable and resilient power grids. The debate rages on how best to provide such services. In a forthcoming report, as well as a webinar on March 17, Navigant Research will analyze and [...]]]>

The spate of extreme weather events in recent years has stirred up interest in the concept of “community resilience”—i.e., the creation of more reliable and resilient power grids. The debate rages on how best to provide such services. In a forthcoming report, as well as a webinar on March 17, Navigant Research will analyze and forecast the size of the market for one of the most promising pathways forward: community resilience microgrids (CRMs).

Ground Up

The drive for increased grid resilience comes from community stakeholders, many of whom also value energy independence, sustainability, and local economic development goals. In New York, crowds as large as 100 to 150 people have shown up at recent community meetings, often braving snowstorms, to learn how they can become involved in developing greater resilience at the community level.

This is the segment of microgrids where the most innovation will occur in terms of business models and regulatory reforms. Why? Many of these systems challenge utility franchise rules that prohibit transfers of power services over public rights-of-ways. It may make inherent sense, in terms of both emergency responses and sustainable urban design schemes, to bundle different kinds of customers served by different utility rate classes into a single microgrid. Such novel aggregations, however, bump up against long-standing utility prohibitions on sharing of power.

Smaller Is Better

In essence, each third-party CRM requires a negotiated settlement and special use exemptions (though there are a few interesting exceptions to this generalization).

It is these issues that are at the core of New York’s Reform the Energy Vision (REV) proceeding, perhaps the most comprehensive review of regulations pertaining to resiliency in the nation.

Some providers, such as the Clean Energy Group, argue that microgrids are the wrong focus, asserting that solar PV and energy storage nanogrids, such as those recently funded in Massachusetts, are a better solution. In the short term, this may be the wiser move, especially if they could be aggregated via a centralized control schemes into virtual power plants.

Such nanogrids represent modular building blocks for energy services that support applications like emergency power for commercial buildings, as described in Navigant Research’s report, Nanogrids. These grids typically serve a single building or a single load, generally below 100 kW in capacity—and thus do not violate regulations prohibiting the transfer or sharing of power across a public right-of-way.

Unquestionably, small grids (including both microgrids and nanogrids) represent a major element of the future of the power sector—an essential building block for the Energy Cloud that will encompass distributed generation resources and intelligent networks to meet energy demand, rather than centralized hub-and-spoke power grids. This spring, Navigant will offer a new collaborative study called The Future of Small Scale Microgrids and Nanogrids that will bring together utilities and their suppliers to better understand the risks and opportunities of this emerging market landscape. Click here for more information.

]]>http://www.navigantresearch.com/blog/community-resilience-and-the-future-of-small-grids/feed0http://www.navigantresearch.com/blog/community-resilience-and-the-future-of-small-gridsOil-Gas Price Swings Slow New Energy Investmenthttp://feedproxy.google.com/~r/NavigantResearchBlog/~3/UNKwTc2cHEA/oil-gas-price-swings-slow-new-energy-investment
http://www.navigantresearch.com/blog/oil-gas-price-swings-slow-new-energy-investment#commentsWed, 18 Feb 2015 23:25:33 +0000https://www.navigantresearch.com/?p=72827As I wrote in this blog in 2012 and in 2013, rising volatility in the oil-to-gas ratio points to a substantial shift in market dynamics for clean energy. Even if short-lived, this shift will have substantial implications for investment in new energy technologies.
In recent years, as the price of oil climbed to over $100 a [...]]]>

As I wrote in this blog in 2012 and in 2013, rising volatility in the oil-to-gas ratio points to a substantial shift in market dynamics for clean energy. Even if short-lived, this shift will have substantial implications for investment in new energy technologies.

In recent years, as the price of oil climbed to over $100 a barrel, the oil-to-gas ratio—which compares the price of a barrel of crude oil to that of a million Btu (mmBtu) of natural gas—spiked to as high as 52:1 in a single month from a relative constant of around 10:1. While this apparent equilibrium had held steady since the mid-1980s, the widening gap between the price of oil and that of gas seemed to represent a new reality, with natural gas prices holding below $3 per mmBtu (Henry Hub).

In the last several months, as oil prices have slid to less than $50 per barrel, that ratio has come crashing back down to Earth. At a current 13:1, the oil-to-gas ratio is once again nearing historic levels—and again reshuffling the deck for a cleantech industry yearning for macroeconomic certainty.

Ratio of Crude Oil to Natural Gas: 1990-2015

(Source: Navigant Research)

While the boom in shale oil and gas recovery (among other factors) has ushered in an apparent return to historical equilibrium, experts are divided on what the future holds. Some argue that the recent spike in the oil-to-gas ratio was a short-term anomaly and that forces will continue to act to bring prices back into their long run equilibrium. Others question whether a stable long-term relationship between crude oil prices and natural gas prices even existed in the first place.

While the jury is still out on the putative correlation between oil and gas prices, we can expect continued volatility in the oil-to-gas ratio. This creates a challenging environment for new energy technologies going head-to-head with existing infrastructure.

The Incumbent Edge

Volatility dampens growth in new energy technologies in several ways. First, it cools investors’ appetite for clean energy ventures, due to the potential risk that seemingly profitable investments one day may turn out to be unprofitable due to changing fuel costs. Building natural gas infrastructure may look attractive in 2012 if you’re in the United States, for example, but not so wise when the price of a barrel of crude oil drops by more than 50% in 2014. This is an issue of asset stranding.

Second, it lowers customers’ tolerance for risk. As noted in our recently published report, Combined Heat and Power for Commercial Buildings, the impact of price swings are most acutely felt by consumers looking to hedge with one fuel against the other. When oil prices accelerated past $100, consumers of heating oil and gasoline, for example, began looking to natural gas alternatives. These decisions can be straightforward when price signals are stable, but actual (or even perceived) volatility favors a wait-and-see approach.

The Underminer

Third, it undermines the role of incentives and other mechanisms for stimulating the deployment of new energy technologies. Still more expensive than incumbent technology in most cases, clean energy has enjoyed incentives that put emerging energy technologies on an even playing field with fossil fuels. Fuel price volatility can make it especially challenging to establish reasonable incentive levels for the long term.

]]>http://www.navigantresearch.com/blog/oil-gas-price-swings-slow-new-energy-investment/feed0http://www.navigantresearch.com/blog/oil-gas-price-swings-slow-new-energy-investmentEnergy Efficiency Economics 101http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/NavigantResearchBlog/~3/odXIv311u3A/energy-efficiency-economics-101
http://www.navigantresearch.com/blog/energy-efficiency-economics-101#commentsWed, 18 Feb 2015 22:45:45 +0000https://www.navigantresearch.com/?p=72869The frequently overlooked component for unlocking the great potential of energy efficiency in commercial buildings is the bottom line: cold hard cash. For commercial building owners and operators, especially those managing small and medium (under 50,000 square feet) facilities, the idea of installing energy-efficient equipment or energy management tools is a nice-to-have, not a need-to-have.
Tenant [...]]]>

The frequently overlooked component for unlocking the great potential of energy efficiency in commercial buildings is the bottom line: cold hard cash. For commercial building owners and operators, especially those managing small and medium (under 50,000 square feet) facilities, the idea of installing energy-efficient equipment or energy management tools is a nice-to-have, not a need-to-have.

Tenant improvement and making a profit by keeping expenses low come before improving or replacing equipment with state-of-the-art efficient alternatives. A recent report from the National Institute of Building Sciences’ Council on Finance, Insurance and Real Estate contains a set of findings and recommendations on how small commercial buildings can implement energy-efficient retrofit projects.

Live Data

The report lays out the case for focusing on small and medium commercial buildings, a dormant $36 billion market opportunity that could provide huge employment opportunities (424,000 job-years) and carbon reductions (87 million metric tons a year). According to Navigant Research’s Energy Management for Small and Medium Buildingsreport, the energy management systems and services associated with this market are expected grow from $231.3 million in revenue in 2013 to $1.3 billion in 2022. The benefits are clear; what can be done?

The report recommends a few multi-tiered sets of actions that could help invigorate this market, at least in the United States. These include federal action, such as expanding research from the Commercial Buildings Energy Consumption Survey (CBECS), which is a critical tool for understanding the state of energy use in commercial buildings, but is only updated every 5 years. CBECS data could be used with benchmarking data to make the collective understanding of building energy data a living data set, providing a meaningful performance-based evaluation of how energy efficiency is actually deployed in existing buildings.

Increasing the Pace

Another recommendation is challenging in this political climate. The Section 179 (D) tax code, a part of the Energy Policy Act (EPAct) that incentivized commercial building energy efficiency, expired at the end of 2013. At $1.80 per square foot for the full achievement of 50% energy reduction, the incentive was helpful. The reliance on modeling was a challenge, and the improvement of benchmarking data drawn from a living version of CBECS could change that.

Finally, the report focuses on the variety of financing that can be made more available to this market. If energy efficiency financing can be presented as a secure investment with known outcomes and well-understood risks, the adjacent available pools of financing could, with some urging, be made available. Increasing the deployment of utility-based on-bill financing is one possibility, but not all utilities in the United States would be open to that approach. Property Assessed Clean Energy (PACE) programs enable energy efficiency (or solar deployments) to be financed by local bonds, and repaid via local property taxes over time. The White House recently announced it would use the success of PACE in the multifamily residential market in California and apply it to federal Housing and Urban Development Department housing.

]]>http://www.navigantresearch.com/blog/energy-efficiency-economics-101/feed0http://www.navigantresearch.com/blog/energy-efficiency-economics-101Differing Diesel Views Sow Auto Industry Confusionhttp://feedproxy.google.com/~r/NavigantResearchBlog/~3/c9TJFkmSZRA/differing-diesel-views-sow-auto-industry-confusion
http://www.navigantresearch.com/blog/differing-diesel-views-sow-auto-industry-confusion#commentsTue, 17 Feb 2015 23:12:59 +0000https://www.navigantresearch.com/?p=72816During January’s North American International Auto Show (NAIAS), several manufacturers announced new diesel models to help them meet increasingly stringent fuel economy standards. Nissan unveiled a second-generation Titan XD that straddles the line between light and heavy duty pickups. Nissan will initially build the Titan XD, scheduled to launch this fall, with only a diesel [...]]]>

During January’s North American International Auto Show (NAIAS), several manufacturers announced new diesel models to help them meet increasingly stringent fuel economy standards. Nissan unveiled a second-generation Titan XD that straddles the line between light and heavy duty pickups. Nissan will initially build the Titan XD, scheduled to launch this fall, with only a diesel engine; gas trucks with V6 and V8 engines will come later.

GM will be introducing a diesel engine in its Chevy Colorado and GMC Canyon later this year that could potentially increase fuel economy from the current 27 mpg to 30 mpg. Fiat Chrysler announced it will be increasing production of the Dodge Ram 1500 EcoDiesel pickup from 10% of models to 20%.

In the world of diesel cars, Volkswagen will unveil the Golf Gran Turismo Diesel (GTD) car at the upcoming Geneva Motor Show in March. Later this year, Suzuki will add an automatic transmission and several other updates to its SX4 S-Cross.

A Particular Problem

Diesel cars and trucks usually attain higher fuel economy ratings than their gasoline counterparts. According to Navigant Research’s report, Automotive Fuel Efficiency Technologies, the share of diesel cars and light trucks in North America is expected to increase from 1% in 2015 to 2.8% in 2025 as automakers continue to introduce more fuel-efficient models.

Paris Mayor Anne Hidalgo has designs on eliminating diesel vehicles from her city by 2020. Mayor Hidalgo recently announced a ban on some diesel delivery trucks and buses, beginning by July 2015. According to Paris24.com, Hidalgo will provide significant financial incentives for investing in less polluting vehicles. London Mayor Boris Johnson has similar concerns around particulate emissions and is doubling the congestion charges for driving diesel vehicles in the city center to £20.

One solution to reduce the amount of diesel emissions is to add a hybrid drivetrain to a diesel vehicle. Hybrid vehicles reduce the use of the diesel engine by relying on battery power during low speeds and when idling, thus reducing particulate emissions. According to Navigant Research’s report, Electric Drive Trucks and Buses, the currently small market for medium and heavy duty diesel hybrid trucks will grow by a 2014–2023 compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 28.5% to nearly 95,000 units worldwide by 2023.